Rabid Radicals Rage at Rasmussen Reports

Democrats are unhappy with one of the best pollsters in the business, asserting that Rasmussen Reports is biased -- and likening it to Fox News.

Democrats are turning their fire on Scott Rasmussen, the prolific independent pollster whose surveys on elections, President Obama’s popularity and a host of other issues are surfacing in the media with increasing frequency.

The pointed attacks reflect a hardening conventional wisdom among prominent liberal bloggers and many Democrats that Rasmussen Reports polls are, at best, the result of a flawed polling model and, at worst, designed to undermine Democratic politicians and the party’s national agenda.

That said, Politico goes on to report that Rasmussen is universally acknowledged -- even among progressive poll watchers -- as one of the best in the business.

Last year, the progressive website FiveThirtyEight.com’s pollster ratings, based on the 2008 presidential primaries, awarded Rasmussen the third-highest mark for its accuracy in predicting the outcome of the contests. And Rasmussen’s final poll of the 2008 general election — showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent — closely mirrored the election’s outcome.

Rasmussen, for his part, explained that his numbers are trending Republican simply because he is screening for only those voters most likely to head to the polls — a pool of respondents, he argues, that just so happens to bend more conservative this election cycle.

Indeed, the conservative trend is easy to explain, what with out-of-control Democrats in Washington greedily pushing for more taxes, more regulations and increased unemployment using vehicles like cap-n-trade, government-run health care, and full unionization of the workplace.

* * *
In related news, Democrats also blasted a long list of organizations for "biased and unfavorable reporting that hurts the administration's agenda". The list includes:

• The Bureau of Labor Statistics for continuing to report on double-digit unemployment and increased mass layoff events.

• USA Today for reporting that job losses during President Obama's rookie year exceeded the job losses in any single year since World War II.

• John Mauldin of Frontline for pointedly noting that almost every government-issued statistic is becoming "more and more distorted" (i.e., bogus).

• Various California newspapers for predicting that the state's home values have yet to hit bottom.

• Tyler Durden of ZeroHedge for warning that the U.S. Treasury stands at risk, stating: "Brace for impact: in 2010, demand for U.S. [bonds] has to increase eleven-fold... or else."

• Wells Fargo for warning that commercial real estate remains dramatically overpriced.

• John Williams of ShadowStats for stating unequivocally that "[the] U.S. has no way of avoiding a financial Armageddon."

• Vincent Fernando of Business Insider for noting that the Baltic Dry Index, which measures the level of international trade, "is collapsing."

• Real estate brokers in California for warning that a tidal wave of "shadow inventory" -- foreclosed properties -- has yet to resurface on the market, which would have "a substantial impact on the [local] housing supply if they were to come onto the market" by crushing home values.

• The New York Times for reporting that as many as 6 million Americans have no income other than food stamps.

Democrats do, however, concede that most of the "biased reporting" issues will fade in importance as the federal government institutes its regulations for bloggers and bails out the newspaper business.